LGBTAI+ Questions, Information and Discussion thread!

[Athedia]

Shale? It's been a while but I seem to remember it being the straight-man of the group, especially opposite Zevran.

But then

Spoiler: DA:O SPOILERS

Show

Shale starts identifying with the dwarf Shale used to be so it gets more complicated. And Shale was not a straight man when it came to pigeons. I miss DA:O, but can't play without wanting to sob all over my keyboard

[Miriel]

They implies you don't know the person's gender; made-up words such as ze or hir imply a made-up concept of gender neutrality. "It" is still a perfectly viable gender-neutral term. That does mean that it's commonly used for objects, but that doesn't mean that it shouldn't be used as a pronoun for humans.

"It" has a gender, and that gender is that of objects and things. "It" is not gender-neutral, it's neuter.

[Togath]

They implies you don't know the person's gender; made-up words such as ze or hir imply a made-up concept of gender neutrality. "It" is still a perfectly viable gender-neutral term. That does mean that it's commonly used for objects, but that doesn't mean that it shouldn't be used as a pronoun for humans.

Contrast VIKI (from I, Robot). VIKI is undeniably an object. She's not intelligent in the conventional sense, and doesn't really have the empathy level required to be a person in the conventional sense ("My logic is undeniable!"). She's an object, albeit a very large and not very physical one. But she's an object. She's also a she. The two are not mutually exclusive. Something can have gendered pronouns (also ships, but they're a bad example as they're not actually perceived as female by anyone). Someone can have genderless pronouns.

Just because you think that other pronouns are "Better" doesn't stop me being an it, and doesn't stop other people having a social obligation to call me that, just as they have an obligation to call everyone else by their preferred pronouns.

It's not about "Reclaiming" it. It's about it making sense.

Just popping in to point out that you completely ignored the explanations for why people find calling someone "it" offputting.

[Jormengand]

"It" has a gender, and that gender is that of objects and things. "It" is not gender-neutral, it's neuter.

Objects and things do not have genders, because they do not have minds (which are kinda a requirement for things which are purely mental). Neuter both literally and in practice means "Neither."

Just popping in to point out that you completely ignored the explanations for why people find calling someone "it" offputting.

They're mainly a rehash of arguments I've already debunked, or else hatred based on history. I don't care about history, I care about now.

I mean, historically, "He" was the word to use for anyone AMAB, but that's no longer the case.

[Irish Musician]

They're mainly a rehash of arguments I've already debunked, or else hatred based on history. I don't care about history, I care about now.

I mean, historically, "He" was the word to use for anyone AMAB, but that's no longer the case.

But Jor, you can't just write off history. Nor can you just write off how other people feel. You can't just put your hands over your ears and not want to hear it. The fact of the matter is, most people are uncomfortable with calling a person "it", and that is something you have to have sympathy for, as well as they having sympathy for what you want to be called. It isn't a one way street.

[Jormengand]

But Jor, you can't just write off history. Nor can you just write off how other people feel. You can't just put your hands over your ears and not want to hear it. The fact of the matter is, most people are uncomfortable with calling a person "it", and that is something you have to have sympathy for, as well as they having sympathy for what you want to be called. It isn't a one way street.

I'm not sure I have a duty to listen to anyone who comes up with a bogus reason for ignoring my preferred pronouns any more than for someone who spitefully uses male pronouns for a trans girl because "I'm not comfortable using female pronouns for him." People's entire gender identity is more important than something which irks you a little.

And again, just because something used to happen, doesn't mean it has to happen any more. Again, I cite the fact that people used to use gender assigned at birth pronouns for people as a normal ocurrance.

[Miriel]

Objects and things do not have genders, because they do not have minds (which are kinda a requirement for things which are purely mental). Neuter both literally and in practice means "Neither."

Yes and no. Grammatical gender and social gender are not the same. Sure, I know the etymology of neutral, but the neuter gender is not just "not feminine or masculine". It is not just a lack of gender, it is a grammatical gender category in itself. It is the gender for inanimate things.

They're mainly a rehash of arguments I've already debunked, or else hatred based on history. I don't care about history, I care about now.

"It" is used to dehumanize various people right now, not just historically.

I mean, historically, "He" was the word to use for anyone AMAB, but that's no longer the case.

What changed is the definition of male gender in society, not the assignation of "he" to male gender.

[Jormengand]

Yes and no. Grammatical gender and social gender are not the same. Sure, I know the etymology of neutral, but the neuter gender is not just "not feminine or masculine". It is the gender for inanimate things. It is not just a lack of gender, it is a grammatical gender category in itself.

Says who? You just made that up on the spot. I say that "It" is what I want to identify with.

"It" is used to dehumanize various people right now, not just historically.

Yes, but practically any word you care to mention has numerous connotations, not all of which are exactly savory. Your point?

What changed is the definition of male gender in society, not the assignation of "he" to male gender.

What is changing now is the definition of the neuter gender in society, not the assignation of "It" to neuter gender.

[Irish Musician]

I'm not sure I have a duty to listen to anyone who comes up with a bogus reason for ignoring my preferred pronouns any more than for someone who spitefully uses male pronouns for a trans girl because "I'm not comfortable using female pronouns for him." People's entire gender identity is more important than something which irks you a little.

And again, just because something used to happen, doesn't mean it has to happen any more. Again, I cite the fact that people used to use gender assigned at birth pronouns for people as a normal ocurrance.

So not being comfortable with calling someone "it" because it dehumanizes people (which by the way still happens today, it isn't just a historical thing, Jor), is a bogus reason? Now you are saying that someone else's feelings don't count, and that isn't right.

[Jormengand]

So not being comfortable with calling someone "it" because it dehumanizes people (which by the way still happens today, it isn't just a historical thing, Jor), is a bogus reason? Now you are saying that someone else's feelings don't count, and that isn't right.

Yes, but practically any word you care to mention has numerous connotations, not all of which are exactly savory. Your point?

Plus, you don't have some inalienable right not to be offended. Using someone's chosen pronouns should be common courtesy.

[Irish Musician]

Plus, you don't have some inalienable right not to be offended. Using someone's chosen pronouns should be common courtesy.

You are completely correct. But you also do not have the right to write-off someone else's feelings. Sympathy for another's feelings must go both ways.

[Togath]

Plus, you don't have some inalienable right not to be offended. Using someone's chosen pronouns should be common courtesy.

But "it" is a demeaning insult. It has been for ages, and still is.
Often used in racist, homophobic, transphobic, etc context.

[Athedia]

Says who? You just made that up on the spot. I say that "It" is what I want to identify with.

Okay, fine. You wish to identify as it. But you don't need to be hostile toward other people who express discomfort. Enrico's point about grammar is actually true and is ground into you if you take a language class.

Yes, but practically any word you care to mention has numerous connotations, not all of which are exactly savory. Your point?

And I use the word "bitch" to refer to a lot of my friends, but if someone expresses that they don't feel comfortable with this because of the connotations I respect their wishes.

I have friends who identify as gender neutral and consider "it" a great insult toward them as people. "It" is still used as an insult. And historical connotations are important, and they help us to not repeat mistakes of the past.

So okay, you identify as it, but understand peoples discomfort with calling you that.

[Jormengand]

You are completely correct. But you also do not have the right to write-off someone else's feelings. Sympathy for another's feelings must go both ways.

I respect your right to have feelings, but your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins. You can be uncomfortable calling me what I want to be called, but I still expect you to do it, rather than using something I find far more demeaning or just spitefully avoiding using pronouns at all.

But "it" is a demeaning insult. It has been for ages, and still is.
Often used in racist, homophobic, transphobic, etc context.

Yes, but practically any word you care to mention has numerous connotations, not all of which are exactly savory. Your point?

Okay, fine. You wish to identify as it. But you don't need to be hostile toward other people who express discomfort. Enrico's point about grammar is actually true and is ground into you if you take a language class.

Funny, because I've taken three language classes. In English, "It" is gender-neutral. In French, "It" doesn't exist. In German "It" is used to refer to, among other things, girls (Das madchen, I can't get an umlaut easily on this keyboard).

And I use the word "bitch" to refer to a lot of my friends, but if someone expresses that they don't feel comfortable with this because of the connotations I respect their wishes.

And I use the word "They" to refer to a lot of my friends, but if someone expresses that they don't feel comfortable with this because of the connotations I respect their wishes.

[Irish Musician]

I respect your right to have feelings, but your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins. You can be uncomfortable calling me what I want to be called, but I still expect you to do it, rather than using something I find far more demeaning or just spitefully avoiding using pronouns at all.

Who said anything about swinging a fist? You seem to be overlooking the fact that I am agreeing with you that if you want to be called "it" then I would call you "it", but my discomfort shouldn't be brushed to the side. To me, calling someone "it" is insulting and dehumanizing. So while I do not understand you want to be called it, I will called you it because those are your wishes. All I want is your sympathy for the fact that calling someone it isn't something I generally do, I think is an insult, and will therefore have trouble using that word to refer to you. If I can have sympathy for your situation, you should be able to have sympathy for mine as well.

edit: Also, "Das" is the female "the" in german Got my words mixed up there

[Athedia]

I respect your right to have feelings, but your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins. You can be uncomfortable calling me what I want to be called, but I still expect you to do it, rather than using something I find far more demeaning or just spitefully avoiding using pronouns at all.

Why do you assume that it is spiteful? I avoid non-personal pronouns a lot.

EDIT: Note about das Madchen (nouns are capitalized by the way). I have taken 6 years of German and while I am not fluent, I know a lot of the rules. The reason for the neuter das is not because girls are considered neuter, no more than all cats (die Katze) are female or dogs (der Hund) are male. It is neuter because of the -chen ending, which is a diminutive form in german. It would still be very rude to refer to a girl as es instead of sie.

Es ist schon. <-- Not polite

Sie ist schon. <-- polite

Sie sind schon. <-- where are these pretty people?

EDIT 2: Das is not the female "the". It is the neuter form.

Grammar time!

Masculine	Feminine	Neuter
Der	Die	Das
Pronouns
ich	wir
du	ihr
er/sie/es	sie
Sie

[Jormengand]

Who said anything about swinging a fist? You seem to be overlooking the fact that I am agreeing with you that if you want to be called "it" then I would call you "it", but my discomfort shouldn't be brushed to the side. To me, calling someone "it" is insulting and dehumanizing. So while I do not understand you want to be called it, I will called you it because those are your wishes. All I want is your sympathy for the fact that calling someone it isn't something I generally do, I think is an insult, and will therefore have trouble using that word to refer to you. If I can have sympathy for your situation, you should be able to have sympathy for mine as well.

It's a metaphor. An analogy, even. I'm perfectly happy for you to dislike using it, but my objection was, you will note, to:

I... would discuss the option of using "they" instead. If they really felt strongly about being referred to as "it", I would probably end up trying to avoid pronouns all together, and I'd expect a fair bit of understanding if I slipped up.

Basically "Tell them to use a pronoun they aren't comfortable with, and if this is objected to, deliberately try to avoid referring to such a person through any pronouns whatsoever."

Why do you assume that it is spiteful? I avoid non-personal pronouns a lot.

See above.

Note about das Madchen (nouns are capitalized by the way). I have taken 6 years of German and while I am not fluent, I know a lot of the rules. The reason for the neuter das is not because girls are considered neuter, no more than all cats (die Katze) are female or dogs (der Hund) are male. It is neuter because of the -chen ending, which is a diminutive form in german. It would still be very rude to refer to a girl as es instead of sie.

Yes, I know this too. That doesn't stop the fact that "Das ist ein Madchen, die schon ist" is a gramatically incorrect statement because the relative pronoun is the wrong gender. You use gender-neutral pronouns for the girl, even though she's not an object.

[Serpentine]

Who said anything about swinging a fist? You seem to be overlooking the fact that I am agreeing with you that if you want to be called "it" then I would call you "it", but my discomfort shouldn't be brushed to the side. To me, calling someone "it" is insulting and dehumanizing. So while I do not understand you want to be called it, I will called you it because those are your wishes. All I want is your sympathy for the fact that calling someone it isn't something I generally do, I think is an insult, and will therefore have trouble using that word to refer to you. If I can have sympathy for your situation, you should be able to have sympathy for mine as well.

Yeah, that. I also never said I would point-blank refuse to refer to someone as "it" if they insisted on it. I said I would try to negotiate for "they" first because it is perfectly functional and is never used as an insult or to dehumanise, that I might just try to avoid using any third-person pronouns for the person at all - not out of spite, but as a compromise between their comfort and mine - and that otherwise I would respect their wishes but would also expect them to respect my discomfort with referring to them with a word that has consistently been A Bad Word To Call People and to be understanding if I accidentally screw it up.
Yes, my right to swing my fist stops at your nose. And yours stops well before it gets into my head.

edit: There was absolutely no "spite" in that whatsoever. And yes, I'm using "they" here because we're referring to a hypothetical other with whom I have not yet had this discussion. If I were talking to you specifically and directly, well, I'd use "you" because that is what makes sense in this context.
I am fully aware that my problems with referring to a human being as "it" are my own, albeit within an extremely solid socio-cultural-linguistic framework. That doesn't make them not real, and that doesn't mean you get to just dismiss them as irrelevant and spit on any attempts at compromise.

[Miriel]

Says who? You just made that up on the spot.

No.
1) Proto-Indo-European had two gender originally, animate and inanimate. The animate gender separated into two genders, masculine and feminine. I can quote my class notes and Wikipedia.
2) In Latin, always, neutral pronouns refer to things, masculine pronouns, to men or groups of men and women, and feminine, to women. However, attribution of gender to noun is more chaotic. I can quote... years of studying Latin?
3) English has a much simpler gender structure. Very few nouns are gendered and only pronouns, etc., are really problematic. Once again, it's as systematic as in Latin here. He = men, She = women, It = inanimate, + They = determined person, unspecified gender, One = undetermined person.

Yes, but practically any word you care to mention has numerous connotations, not all of which are exactly savory. Your point?

AFAIK, "it" can refer to objects, concepts or thing, to animals to whom we have no attachment, to concepts, to entire propositions, or it can be used as an impersonal pronoun -- or to dehumanize people by characterizing them as objects or animals. Having many meanings does not mean all meanings are possible.

I honestly dislike calling anyone a "it". A table lamp is a "it". You are not a table lamp. Perhaps in other language with neuter gender it would work better, but in English, it really doesn't.

You can ask to be called whatever you like if you desire, and I'll do my best to comply. However, one person cannot change a language single-handedly -- it requires some amount of collective consensus, because language is a social institution. Extended use of singular "they" has that, even completely new pronouns like s/he or xe have some support from many people. AFAIK, "it" doesn't.

What is changing now is the definition of the neuter gender in society, not the assignation of "It" to neuter gender.

The analogy doesn't work, because of what I said. Neuter gender in grammar is used for things, not people.

[Jormengand]

I might just try to avoid using any third-person pronouns for the person at all - not out of spite, but as a compromise between their comfort and mine - and that otherwise I would respect their wishes but would also expect them to respect my discomfort with referring to them with a word that has consistently been A Bad Word To Call People and to be understanding if I accidentally screw it up.

Or you could confer to that person the same courtesy you confer to all other people, and call them by their chosen pronouns.

Yes, it makes you uncomfortable, but guess what? People do things which make them uncomfortable all the damn time. The fact that it makes you uncomfortable is no excuse to avoid doing it.

I honestly dislike calling anyone a "it". A table lamp is a "it". You are not a table lamp. Perhaps in other language with neuter gender it would work better, but in English, it really doesn't.

You can ask to be called whatever you like if you desire, and I'll do my best to comply. However, one person cannot change a language single-handedly -- it requires some sort of consensus, because language is a social institution. Extended use of singular "they" has that, even completely new pronouns like s/he or xe have some support from many people. AFAIK, "it" doesn't.

The analogy doesn't work, because of what I said. Neuter gender in grammar is used for things, not people.

First, look up "Denying the antecedent."

Second, I'm not objecting to people who actually comply with my chosen pronouns. I'm objecting to people who waste effort avoiding it.

Third, male and female gender always used to be used for assignment at birth... I feel like I'm repeating myself. Oh wait, I'm repeating myself. What a surprise.

[Serpentine]

Or you could confer to that person the same courtesy you confer to all other people, and call them by their chosen pronouns.

Yes, it makes you uncomfortable, but guess what? People do things which make them uncomfortable all the damn time. The fact that it makes you uncomfortable is no excuse to avoid doing it.

And in practice, that is probably what I would eventually end up doing. In the meantime, we were asked what our initial response would be. I gave an honest answer. And honestly, I'd be kind of surprised if a person even noticed that I was preferencing not using third-person pronouns to refer to them.
People also compromise "all the damn time". If you can't ever handle that, well, as someone said upthread, you're gonna have a hard time.

Basically: A sober conversation with a specific person specifically requesting that I refer to them as "it" would probably result in me using "it" for that person if my sentence structure required me to. A stranger railing at me for being honest about my discomfort due to a whole lot of very solid cultural, social and linguistic issues surrounding referring to a human being as "it" and completely dismissing both my feelings on the matter, the wider context and my already-expressed intentions of compromise isn't likely to do a whole lot about that discomfort.

[Irish Musician]

It's a metaphor. An analogy, even. I'm perfectly happy for you to dislike using it, but my objection was, you will note, to:

Basically "Tell them to use a pronoun they aren't comfortable with, and if this is objected to, deliberately try to avoid referring to such a person through any pronouns whatsoever."

Yes, I know this too. That doesn't stop the fact that "Das ist ein Madchen, die schon ist" is a gramatically incorrect statement because the relative pronoun is the wrong gender. You use gender-neutral pronouns for the girl, even though she's not an object.

I realize it was a metaphor, thank you. I was going along with it. I wasn't swinging fists, was my point. And your objection, once again, is unfounded as I have said many time I would use whatever pronouns someone wants me to use. My point is that you can't just expect people to call you it and be ok with it. That is all. You want respect which is fine, but so do they. Respect goes both ways.


But gender neutral in German is different than that in English. We don't have the same system of grammatical gender as they do. Das in german is commonplace when put in front of Madchen. It is not a commonplace pronoun in english when referring to people and is considered an insult 99.9% of the time.

[Jormengand]

And in practice, that is probably what I would eventually end up doing. In the meantime, we were asked what our initial response would be. I gave an honest answer. And honestly, I'd be kind of surprised if a person even noticed that I was preferencing not using third-person pronouns to refer to them.
People also compromise "all the damn time". If you can't ever handle that, well, as someone said upthread, you're gonna have a hard time.

There are things where you don't have to compromise. You have to acknowledge my chosen pronouns, I don't have to acknowledge your right to act like a jerk. As one Rich Burlew put it, "If you're arguing in favour of your inalienable right to treat someone else like crap, you're on the wrong side of the argument."

I realize it was a metaphor, thank you. I was going along with it. I wasn't swinging fists, was my point. And your objection, once again, is unfounded as I have said many time I would use whatever pronouns someone wants me to use. My point is that you can't just expect people to call you it and be ok with it. That is all. You want respect which is fine, but so do they. Respect goes both ways.


But gender neutral in German is different than that in English. We don't have the same system of grammatical gender as they do. Das in german is commonplace when put in front of Madchen. It is not a commonplace pronoun in english when referring to people and is considered an insult 99.9% of the time.

My objection was never about you, it was about Serpentine.

I only brought up German because someone else brought up languages.

Thank you for your strawmen. Please burn them.

[Athedia]

Or you could confer to that person the same courtesy you confer to all other people, and call them by their chosen pronouns.

Yes, it makes you uncomfortable, but guess what? People do things which make them uncomfortable all the damn time. The fact that it makes you uncomfortable is no excuse to avoid doing it.

I did say that I don't like to use pronouns not referring to myself right? How is that an insult, to anyone? The only reason I refer to my friends in third person on the forum is because I don't want to make their identities public. In these cases I will usually refer to them as they simply because who I know is no-one business. But in person I usually use their names for a few reasons. I have trouble remembering names so only constant repetition helps me remember. I mix up names constantly (so most of my friends turn around now no matter whose name I say) and it helps me keep the correct name in my mind. I also have to slow down my speech when using names which makes me understandable and helps keep me from rambling. How are these insults to you?

And in practice, that is probably what I would eventually end up doing. In the meantime, we were asked what our initial response would be. I gave an honest answer. And honestly, I'd be kind of surprised if a person even noticed that I was preferencing not using third-person pronouns to refer to them.
People also compromise "all the damn time". If you can't ever handle that, well, as someone said upthread, you're gonna have a hard time.

Basically: A sober conversation with a specific person specifically requesting that I refer to them as "it" would probably result in me using "it" for that person if my sentence structure required me to. A stranger railing at me for being honest about my discomfort due to a whole lot of very solid cultural, social and linguistic issues surrounding referring to a human being as "it" and completely dismissing both my feelings on the matter, the wider context and my already-expressed intentions of compromise isn't likely to do a whole lot about that discomfort.

Thank you Serpentine. This is what I have wanted to say but haven't figured out how. That we were asked a question and answered it but are now being given a lecture for our answer is a little frustrating.

I don't want to scare people with questions away from this thread

[Serpentine]

Reposting my edit since it'll probably have been missed:

Basically: A sober conversation with a specific person specifically requesting that I refer to them as "it" would probably result in me using "it" for that person if my sentence structure required me to. A stranger railing at me for being honest about my discomfort due to a whole lot of very solid cultural, social and linguistic issues surrounding referring to a human being as "it" and completely dismissing both my feelings on the matter, the wider context and my already-expressed intentions of compromise isn't likely to do a whole lot about that discomfort.

Nowhere have I, or anyone else, said we don't "acknowledge your chosen pronouns". We have just expressed our discomfort at using them, and our reasons for that discomfort, and what we would do about - mostly boiling down to "adhere to it, despite our discomfort, or just bypass the matter completely when possible", varying from person to person.

[Jormengand]

I did say that I don't like to use pronouns not referring to myself right? How is that an insult, to anyone? The only reason I refer to my friends in third person on the forum is because I don't want to make their identities public. In these cases I will usually refer to them as they simply because who I know is no-one business. But in person I usually use their names for a few reasons. I have trouble remembering names so only constant repetition helps me remember. I mix up names constantly (so most of my friends turn around now no matter whose name I say) and it helps me keep the correct name in my mind. I also have to slow down my speech when using names which makes me understandable and helps keep me from rambling. How are these insults to you?

I don't give a damn about most of you. The only reason I'm even responding is because you people are dogpiling me for daring to have a different opinion from Serpentine.

Damn, I feel like I'm turning into Kalmageddon. Someone help me.

just bypass the matter completely when possible

That's what I have objection to.

"I don't like your choice of pronoun, so I won't use any at all!"

[Serpentine]

My objection was never about you, it was about Serpentine.

Nice to know I'm a representative for Caroline, Atheda, Togath, Siosilvar, and possibly others I've missed.

If you're being "dogpiled", it's for insisting that we have to have the same opinion as you. Nowhere have I, nor anyone else, said we would point-blank refuse to use "it" if someone asked us to. Nowhere have I, nor anyone else, said you cannot choose to identify as "it". You are attacking stances we are not holding, and denying us our right to hold the ones we do (or rather, the reality that whether you deny or allow us that right, we'll have it anyway, because of all the reasons that have already been well-listed for them).


edit: "Using your choice of pronoun makes me feel like I'm dehumanising and insulting you, for various social, cultural and linguistic reasons, even though consciously I know that since it's by your own request it's not, although others likely won't know that if you haven't told them too and will probably assume that I'm being horrible to you. So I'll try and minimise the amount I use it (which generally won't be within your earshot anyway) if you are really determined that you must be referred to in that way, as a compromise between your comfort and mine, at least until I can get used to it."

[Marnath]

Q: Does asexuality count as something you can "be in the closet" about? I'm not really sure whether it does or not since it's technically an absence rather than the presence of a non-hetero sexuality? I don't consider myself to be in a closet, but then again I don't tell people in real life, either.

[Serpentine]

Q: Does asexuality count as something you can "be in the closet" about? I'm not really sure whether it does or not since it's technically an absence rather than the presence of a non-hetero sexuality? I don't consider myself to be in a closet, but then again I don't tell people in real life, either.

Not sure... Do people "fake" non-asexuality?

[Jormengand]

Nice to know I'm a representative for Caroline, Atheda, Togath, Siosilvar, and possibly others I've missed.

If you're being "dogpiled", it's for insisting that we have to have the same opinion as you. Nowhere have I, nor anyone else, said we would point-blank refuse to use "it" if someone asked us to. Nowhere have I, nor anyone else, said you cannot choose to identify as "it". You are attacking stances we are not holding, and denying us our right to hold the ones we do (or rather, the reality that whether you deny or allow us that right, we'll have it anyway, because of all the reasons that have already been well-listed for them).

You have said numerous times that you would avoid using pronouns completely if I insisted, as I quite rightly do, on you using my chosen ones. This is offensive to me. I don't give a damn if you're uncomfortable with calling me by my chosen pronoun, any more than I give a damn about your race, sexuality, or any other aspect of you irrelevant to your worth as a person. Al I expect is that you use my pronouns, and that you do not attempt to avoid using any pronouns at all, just because you don't like the ones I want you to use.

That is all.

Q: Does asexuality count as something you can "be in the closet" about? I'm not really sure whether it does or not since it's technically an absence rather than the presence of a non-hetero sexuality? I don't consider myself to be in a closet, but then again I don't tell people in real life, either.

I'd say yes, pretty much. The idea of being "In the closet" about X basically means hiding the fact that X. The same way that people are referred to as being a "Closet [insert whatever here]" even if the whatever isn't actually about sexuality at all.